Many thanks to people, especially the ones from Asia staying up to 1am, participating in this meeting. Here is the recording of the Interim meeting: https://ietf.webex.com/ietf/ldr.php?RCID=568242edccfb24986f6d129648cf5e83
Here is my rough notes. Please add more if I miss something. Minutes of the Interim Meeting on Discussing consistency between Data Model and Information Model Participants: John Strassner; Diego Lopez; Jinyong Kim; Frank Xia; Dyhyun Hyun; Sangwon Hyun, Cataldo Basile; Dong Jin Hong; Yoav Nir; Linda Dunbar; and Kathleen Moriarty Time: Oct 20, 2017 12pm EST - 1: 15pm EST Key Points from the discussion: draft-kim-i2nsf-nsf-facing-interface-data-model-03: Section 4: Should not use "Event/Condition/Action Policy", Should use "Event/Condition/Event Clause" instead. Change the wording to This subsection is to describe the condition clause. Condition clause is used to describe the set of attributes for "Condition Clause"... Section 4.5: it is not "Resolution Strategy Policy". Instead, "Resolution Strategy" is the mechanism to ensure the integrity of the rules, especially when there are rules which conflict among them. It is the formal algebra to express how to detect the conflicts and how to resolve conflicts. Section 5: add an introduction stating that the data model structure descrpbed in this section can be mapped to draft-ietf-i2nsf-capability" Section 5.2: The three attributes "use-sec-event-content", "usr-se-event-format", and "usr-sec-event-type" appeared in multiple places (under "usr-event", "dev-event" and "sys-event"). It is better to combine those three attributes as one "Identity" so that only one "Identity" is appearing 3 times. In case there are changes to any of one of those attributes, the reference identity stay the same. Section 5.3: Should reference the "address types" already defined by https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-netmod-acl-model/ such as: yang:mac-address inet: ipv6-prefix inet: ipv4-prefix, inet: dicp etc. draft-xia-i2nsf-security-policy-object-01 Frank stated that this draft is meant to define the abstract types to be further used by nsf-facing-dm draft. For example, "Address Objects" and "service Object" can be defined clearly, so that other Data Model drafts can simply use those objects instead of re-defining them in multiple places. Frank will work with the Data model drafts authors to clear out what is defined on where. Thank you very much. Linda & Yoav
_______________________________________________ I2nsf mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/i2nsf
